RE: OWL-Time - ISSUE-65: General purpose temporal predicates

Thanks Andrea - 

1. I have added the DCAT example below to the examples file 
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/time/rdf/OWL-Time-examples.ttl 
and also added the necessary import to http://reference.data.gov.uk/def/intervals/ and 
http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/quarter/2006-Q1 

(note that  http://reference.data.gov.uk/def/reference 404s :-( )

There is essentially nothing to be done to update. 
The only thing I noticed is 

http://reference.data.gov.uk/def/intervals/hasXsdDurationDescription 

whose definition is almost the same as  the new 

http://www.w3.org/2006/time#hasXSDDuration

so in the example 

<http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/quarter/2006-Q1>
  interval:hasXsdDurationDescription "P3M"^^xsd:duration ; .

would become 

<http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/quarter/2006-Q1>
  time:hasXSDDuration "P3M"^^xsd:duration ; .

This property was only added to the new OWL-Time recently, so this application appears to corroborate the requirement - thanks! 

The entity http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/quarter/2006-Q1 is very elaborate. 
While it uses some OWL-Time elements directly[*] it mostly uses the "intervals" ontology (mentioned above), which is _derived from_ OWL-Time, so I'm not sure that we can create a compact example for the document. 
I could do a stripped-down version that only includes the OWL-Time elements. 

Maybe we should also add some Links to applications that use OWL-Time, like this.  

[*] I notice that some of the triples in 2006-Q1 are actually incorrect - 

<http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/quarter/2006-Q1>
  time:intervalContains <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/month/2006-01> ;
  time:intervalContains <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/month/2006-02> ;
  time:intervalContains <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/month/2006-03> ; . 

should be 

<http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/quarter/2006-Q1>
  time:intervalStartedBy <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/month/2006-01> ;
  time:intervalContains <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/month/2006-02> ;
  time:intervalFinishedBy <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/month/2006-03> ; . 

In this branch: 
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/simon-time-document/time/rdf/OWL-Time-examples.ttl 

2. I'll need some help to re-craft that for a temporal example. 

3. Again - I'd need a specific example to code up. Lets ask Lars. 
However, note that we did not address the fuzzy/uncertain time requirement, though I think some of Lars examples just relate to temporal topology, where the actual time-positions are uncertain but the relative positions are known? 

Simon 

-----Original Message-----
From: andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu [mailto:andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu] 
Sent: Tuesday, 11 April, 2017 02:57
To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org; L.Svensson@dnb.de
Subject: RE: OWL-Time - ISSUE-65: General purpose temporal predicates

Hi, Simon.

About the examples, some ideas:

1. I think it would be good to re-use the relevant example in DCAT:

https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/#basic-example

Here's the relevant snippet:

:dataset-001
       a dcat:Dataset ;
       dct:title "Imaginary dataset" ;
       dcat:keyword "accountability","transparency" ,"payments" ;
       dct:issued "2011-12-05"^^xsd:date ;
       dct:modified "2011-12-05"^^xsd:date ;
       dcat:contactPoint <http://example.org/transparency-office/contact> ;
       dct:temporal <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/quarter/2006-Q1> ;
       dct:spatial <http://www.geonames.org/6695072> ;
       dct:publisher :finance-ministry ;
       dct:language <http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/iso639-1/en>  ;
       dct:accrualPeriodicity <http://purl.org/linked-data/sdmx/2009/code#freq-W>  ;
       dcat:distribution :dataset-001-csv ;

Note that

       dct:temporal <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/quarter/2006-Q1> ;

points to an RDF representation of a time interval based on the original Time Ontology (+ other ones). So, it could be re-written by using the new version.

2. We can re-use the examples in the BP, e.g., the one about the BAG Address dataset. 

https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-bp/#ex-geodcat-ap-bag-addresses

3. It would be good to have also an example of a dataset specifying as temporal coverage "spatio-temporal events" as those described in Lars's use case:

https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#PublishingCulturalHeritageData


Andrea

----
Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
Scientific / Technical Project Officer
European Commission DG JRC
Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
Unit B6 - Digital Economy
Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
21027 Ispra VA, Italy

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/

----
The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission.


________________________________________
From: PEREGO Andrea (JRC-ISPRA)
Sent: 10 April 2017 18:16
To: Simon.Cox@csiro.au
Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
Subject: RE: OWL-Time - ISSUE-65: General purpose temporal predicates

Hi, Simon, and sorry for my late reply.

I can try and provide an example about the use of the Time Ontology in metadata, if it is not too late.

Please let me know

Thanks

Andrea

----
Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
Scientific / Technical Project Officer
European Commission DG JRC
Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
Unit B6 - Digital Economy
Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
21027 Ispra VA, Italy

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/

----
The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission.


________________________________________
From: Simon.Cox@csiro.au [Simon.Cox@csiro.au]
Sent: 02 February 2017 01:40
To: Simon.Cox@csiro.au; andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
Subject: RE: OWL-Time - ISSUE-65: General purpose temporal predicates

> In general, I think it would be good to have an explicit example on how to use the Time Ontology in metadata, where we also have issues like, e.g., specifying "open" intervals (i.e., with just a start / end date) and using "nominal periods" (e.g., geological / archeological eras).

Could you help with that?

Simon

-----Original Message-----
From: Simon.Cox@csiro.au [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au]
Sent: Thursday, 2 February, 2017 11:28
To: andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
Subject: [ExternalEmail] RE: OWL-Time - ISSUE-65: General purpose temporal predicates

Probably what you are looking for is

time:ProperInterval

with the properties

time:hasBeginning
time:hasEnd

and the rule that they are not coincident.

Simon

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Perego [mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu]
Sent: Thursday, 26 January, 2017 08:43
To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: OWL-Time - ISSUE-65: General purpose temporal predicates

Hi, Simon.

Not sure this issue was sorted out, but I would like to raise a question more related to the use of time periods in metadata.

The typical case is the temporal coverage of a dataset. Following DCAT, this is done by using dct:temporal + dct:PeriodOfTime. However, in DCAT no specific properties are recommended for start / end date(time). This has been addressed in ADMS, by using schema:startDate and schema:endDate, respectively. And this solution has also been adopted in DCAT-AP.

I've checked the Time Ontology, but I'm not completely sure which are the properties that can be used for this purpose (time:hasBeginning?
time:hasEnd?). Also, I wonder whether / how dct:PeriodOfTime matches in the Time Ontology model (time:TemporalEntity? time:Interval?).

In general, I think it would be good to have an explicit example on how to use the Time Ontology in metadata, where we also have issues like, e.g., specifying "open" intervals (i.e., with just a start / end date) and using "nominal periods" (e.g., geological / archeological eras).

Thanks!

Andrea


On 28/12/2016 20:16, Simon.Cox@csiro.au wrote:
> The primary goal of OWL-Time is to implement Allen's temporal 
> relations in OWL, so all the OWL-Time predicates have Temporal classes 
> as both domain and range. For example, 'hasBeginning' relates a 
> temporal entity to a temporal instant. This means that attaching 
> timing information to any event or activity using one of these 
> predicates implies that it _/is/_ a "Temporal Entity". This would be 
> inconsistent with the approach used in the OGC/ISO Feature Model for 
> associating geometry with a feature, in which feature types are 
> _/not/_ subclassed from geometries, but have associations with 
> geometries. At least that would be the argument if time is treated the same as geometry.
>
>
>
> As there appears to be interest in standard predicates to associate 
> timing information to events or activities, we have a problem. One 
> solution (ISSUE-64) would be to relax the global domain constraints on 
> the existing predicates. Alternatively, we can create some general 
> purpose object properties, such as the following:
>
>
>
> :activityBeginning
>
>   rdfs:comment "Beginning of an event or activity."@en ;
>
>   rdfs:range :Instant ;
>
> .
>
> :activityDuration
>
>   rdfs:comment "Duration of an event or activity, expressed as a 
> scaled value"@en ;
>
>   rdfs:range :Duration ;
>
> .
>
> :activityDurationDescription
>
>   rdfs:comment "Duration of an event or activity, expressed using a 
> structured description"@en ;
>
>   rdfs:range :GeneralDurationDescription ;
>
> .
>
> :activityEnd
>
>   rdfs:comment "End of an event or activity."@en ;
>
>   rdfs:range :Instant ;
>
> .
>
> :activityTime
>
>   rdfs:comment "Supports the assignment of a temporal entity (instant 
> or
> interval) with an event or activity"@en ;
>
>  rdfs:range :TemporalEntity ;
>
> .
>
>
>
> The slightly awkward names are because hasBeginning, hasDuration etc 
> are already in use.
>
> Not at all wedded to activity*. Could be event* or something else if 
> anyone has any smart ideas.
>
>
>
> I've added these to the branch here:
>
> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/simon-time-predicates/time/rdf/time.tt
> l
>
>
>
> OTOH, some upper-level ontologies make a fundamental distinction 
> between time-bounded entities (occurrent or perdurant) and 
> non-time-bounded entities (continuant or endurant). If we accept this 
> viewpoint, then we might just use the original OWL-Time predicates and 
> accept the entailment.  I guess it depends which fundamental 
> commitment we are willing to make.
>
>
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> *Simon J D Cox *
>
> Research Scientist
>
> Environmental Informatics
>
> CSIRO Land and Water <http://www.csiro.au/Research/LWF>
>
>
>
> *E*simon.cox@csiro.au <mailto:simon.cox@csiro.au>*T*+61 3 9545 2365
> *M*+61 403 302 672
>
>    /Mail:/Private Bag 10, Clayton South, Vic 3169
>
> /   Visit: /Central Reception,//Research Way, Clayton, Vic 3168
>
> /   Deliver: /Gate 3, Normanby Road, Clayton, Vic 3168
>
> people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox <http://people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox>
>
> orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420 <http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420>
>
> researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Cox3
> <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Cox3>
>
> github.com/dr-shorthair <https://github.com/dr-shorthair>
>
>
>
> *PLEASE NOTE*
>
> The information contained in this email may be confidential or 
> privileged. Any unauthorised use or disclosure is prohibited. If you 
> have received this email in error, please delete it immediately and 
> notify the sender by return email. Thank you. To the extent permitted 
> by law, CSIRO does not represent, warrant and/or guarantee that the 
> integrity of this communication has been maintained or that the 
> communication is free of errors, virus, interception or interference.
>
>
>
> /Please consider the environment before printing this email./
>
>
>
>
>

--
Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
Scientific / Technical Project Officer
European Commission DG JRC
Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
Unit B6 - Digital Economy
Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
21027 Ispra VA, Italy

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/

----
The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission.

Received on Tuesday, 18 April 2017 10:54:14 UTC